1 MEELLION Signatures!!!!

[thereisnospoon]

Thanks for nothing. If you are not even going to bother responding to the actual content of my posts please refrain from responding to my posts in the future. Thank you.

I responded to the content.
Your whining continued. Too bad.

There is a HUGE difference between saying that you did and actually doing it.

I posted about the law and your "response" was to quote one sentence of the law out of the context of the whole and post a smiley face while not really addressing the content or the law.

Then I posted a question about right wing money entering the state from outside sources since rightwingers are complaining about outside money on the left and no comment from you.

Again I point out the law and how walker sued to have a judge legislate from the bench to expand the responsibilities of the GAB and you couldn't respond to that specifics argument and then started parroting the same hypocritical BS abot how you are "Okay" with spending tax payer money to pay for this expansion of responsibilities while never commenting on walkers part in it nor his shifting the burden from himself to the state.

Then I ask how you can be against the expense of the recount and for walker making the state pay for it and you prvided no response to that specific question.

Then you take it one step further and claim that the unions or soros should pay for it even though that is completely opposite of WI law while you have NO comment on walker making the state pay for it.

Then you repeated the same question about "who weeded out the false names and invalid addresses" even AFTER I corrected my incorrect tense and explained that they would WEED them out. However, still no response to walkers shifting the responsibility from himself to the state other than parroting previous nonresponsive bs.

Furthermore, the cost of the recall is a core point that rightwingers including yourself have brought up. So it's funny how you are not concerned about walker adding to the costs?

That reeks of hypocrisy so thanks again for nothing.

Winning a lawsuit is no where close to 'legislating from the bench'...Walker's legal team won a judgement. Tough shit.

 

[drsmith1072]

The recall signature verifcation is being done at an undisclosed location to "protect staff and the process".
Take a wild guess who they want to protect them from.

uh my guess would be those who want this not to succeed. WHy would those who want it to succeed interfere and try to mess it up??




UH why would the union's desire to follow the existing law and standards trouble me?? How does walker's CHOICE to sue to expand the requirements of the GAB show that the union "forced" this judge to do anything?? Walker sued therefore he was the one "forcing" the issue.
BTW, Does the FACT that walker sued and had a judge legislate from the bench to expand the responsibility of the GAB, remove responsibility from walker as the chellenger of the petition add the cost of this shift to the state trouble you??



Thanks for the baseless opinion but it since it fits in with the rest of your rant it really is no surprise.

Illegible addresses are the biggest problem they have. Any signature with an illegible address needs to be kicked out as that is a common practice to add duplicate signatures to petititons and attempt to have them validated.

And the GAB's previous standard would have required the removal of illegible addresses so walkers lawsuit was uneccessary and expensive as it tranfered the cost of his challenge from himslef to the state.
So much for those budget concerns.

Your denial that the union does not want the GAB to enforce existing law as that is all the Judges' ruling stated and your claim that the GAB was asked to "expand" their charge is proof positive you either do not know the law, refuse to educate yourself as to the law, both or you are not being honest.

Really?? Care to prove that accusation?? I cited the law and showed how it stated that challenging the duplicate and questionable signatures was walkers responsibility BEFORE he sued and had a judge legislate from the bench but what have you offered to back up your arguments beside baseless opinions and personal attacks??

But one with a knowledge of the history of THE LAW as applied to union thuggery and power in the government unions in Wisconsin looks a little further back to show the truth there in recent elections:
In the 2010 Supreme Court ruling of Citizens United v. FEC corporations and unions were permitted to spend unlimited amounts of $$$ from the general treasuries to independently advocate for or against candidates.
Since 1905 unions had been BANNED in Wisconsin from making independent spending.
Since the ban was lifted over 40% of ALL independent campaign spending has been from the unions and their cronies on Democratic candidates ONLY.
Now who in their right mind believes that every union member, teacher and government employee in Wisconsin that is in a union that HAS to pay union dues is a Democrat?

That's a nice partisan opinion laced history lesson with no source but what does that have to do with anything and how does it address any of my counters to your bs spin from the previous post??


Here is the law and few grounds for challenges that MUST BE PROVEN BY THE CHALLENGER of the petition which is walker.

Challenges to a Recall Petition
Within 10 days after a recall petition is offered for filing, the officeholder can challenge its sufficiency. The challenge must be made in the form of a written, sworn complaint.
The challenge must specify any alleged insufficiency in the petition. Any challenge to the validity of signatures on a recall petition must demonstrate by affidavits or other supporting evidence a failure to comply with statutory requirements. The burden of proof is on the challenger. The information on a recall petition is presumed to be valid unless proven otherwise. El.Bd. 2.11., Wis. Adm. Code.
Some of the grounds for challenge and the resulting effect are:
• Grounds: An elector has signed the recall petition more than once.
Resulting Effect: The second and subsequent signatures are not counted.
• Grounds: A person signed the name of another elector.
Resulting Effect: The signature may not be counted, unless the elector was unable to sign due to physical disability and authorized the individual to sign in his or her behalf. In this case, a notation clarifying the situation should be made on the petition by the signer.
• Grounds: An individual is ineligible to sign the petition because he or she is not a qualified elector of the district or jurisdiction.
Resulting Effect: The signature may not be counted.

http://elections.state.wi.us/docview.asp?docid=14632&locid=47

According to the law verfying duplicates and challenging them was walker's responsibility as challenger of the petition. He sued to have the GAB do his job as challenger of the petition for him. Any signatures not removed by the GAB's review, INCLUDING DUPLICATES, were walkers responsibility.
Why is that FACT so hard for you to understand.

Now if you want to SHOW by citing an actual source and providing anything REAL to substantiate your accusation that I am wrong then by all means do so.
Until then your ramblings are nothing more than baseless partisan rhetoric and desperate attempts to attack a poster personally because you can't counter the message he is delivering.

I also find it hilarious that I responded to every aspect of your post but you failed do the same and also failed to answer any of the questions that I asked of you.
What are you afraid of?

 

[drsmith1072]

Actually this is what fitz believes.



Nevermind the fact that public sector workers are taxpayers too. LOL

Government workers are servants and the rest of us are their masters. Nice.

I think I was pretty damn close enough.

Really dude?
Get this through your thick as a brick liberal skull..Public employees SERVE the PUBLIC.
Their wages are funded BY THE TAXPAYERS..
The public is not a "master". However, public employees are in SERVICE to the public.

So let me get this straight we were right for calling him out for referring to the public as the masters of public workers but we were wrong for calling him out for referring to public workers as servants because in your words they "serve the public?"

It's nice that you can separate the two of them to suit your needs. However in the context that he used them it's not really that simple. Masters and servants has a pretty distinct meaning when used together in the context that he used and to try to separate them after the fact that they were used together only goes to show how desperate some posters on the right are becoming.

Oh and how about how pubic workers seeing as how they are taxpayers fund their own wages. LOL I never get tired of that pointless argument from rightwingers. LOL

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thanks for nothing. If you are not even going to bother responding to the actual content of my posts please refrain from responding to my posts in the future. Thank you.

I responded to the content.
Your whining continued. Too bad.

There is a HUGE difference between saying that you did and actually doing it.

I posted about the law and your "response" was to quote one sentence of the law out of the context of the whole and post a smiley face while not really addressing the content or the law.

Then I posted a question about right wing money entering the state from outside sources since rightwingers are complaining about outside money on the left and no comment from you.

Again I point out the law and how walker sued to have a judge legislate from the bench to expand the responsibilities of the GAB and you couldn't respond to that specifics argument and then started parroting the same hypocritical BS abot how you are "Okay" with spending tax payer money to pay for this expansion of responsibilities while never commenting on walkers part in it nor his shifting the burden from himself to the state.

Then I ask how you can be against the expense of the recount and for walker making the state pay for it and you prvided no response to that specific question.

Then you take it one step further and claim that the unions or soros should pay for it even though that is completely opposite of WI law while you have NO comment on walker making the state pay for it.

Then you repeated the same question about "who weeded out the false names and invalid addresses" even AFTER I corrected my incorrect tense and explained that they would WEED them out. However, still no response to walkers shifting the responsibility from himself to the state other than parroting previous nonresponsive bs.

Furthermore, the cost of the recall is a core point that rightwingers including yourself have brought up. So it's funny how you are not concerned about walker adding to the costs?

That reeks of hypocrisy so thanks again for nothing.

Outside money entered the state? OMG! So what.
Walker sued and won, so what?
I am okay with the state paying to subtract the phony signatures.
Money well spent.
I haven't said a thing about the cost of the recall, if it happens.
No, not concerned about the cost of checking the petitions.
You're welcome.
Thanks for whining.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Government workers are servants and the rest of us are their masters. Nice.

I think I was pretty damn close enough.

Really dude?
Get this through your thick as a brick liberal skull..Public employees SERVE the PUBLIC.
Their wages are funded BY THE TAXPAYERS..
The public is not a "master". However, public employees are in SERVICE to the public.

So let me get this straight we were right for calling him out for referring to the public as the masters of public workers but we were wrong for calling him out for referring to public workers as servants because in your words they "serve the public?"

It's nice that you can separate the two of them to suit your needs. However in the context that he used them it's not really that simple. Masters and servants has a pretty distinct meaning when used together in the context that he used and to try to separate them after the fact that they were used together only goes to show how desperate some posters on the right are becoming.

Oh and how about how pubic workers seeing as how they are taxpayers fund their own wages. LOL I never get tired of that pointless argument from rightwingers. LOL

How difficult is it to understand that public employees SERVE the public..That is their ******* job.
This is not suiting anything. You are merely projecting.
You have NO valid argument here.
You are in defense of an archaic system that has tested the patience of the taxpayers to the point where they have said "NO MORE"...
Public worker unions have been feeding from the trough of greed for long enough. Taxpayers are fighting back. This is just the beginning. Wisconsin's beat back of public worker unions is not unique.
Indiana, Ohio New York and New Jersey are other states where the way government does business with public worker's unions are being challenged...Still other states are considering ending defined benefit pensions and rolling back health insurance coverage to contain costs.
Stop trying to argue a dead point.
This really has nothing to do with the public employees. This is about taxpayers and taxes . Taxes collected to fund public worker wages and benefits are unsustainable.

 

[drsmith1072]

Oh good we're gonna try that game, are we?

They're taxpayers too and are paying taxes that pay their own salary. Sorry, but I don't give a **** about playing semantics with employee money that is taxed.

Are you actually trying to argue that public sector taxpayers are somehow less of a citizen and don't or shouldn't have the same rights and private sector workers?? Oh wait you already did that.






I can't wait to see what your warped mind dreamt up,



So government builds nothing and provides no services for the money that they bring in through taxation, they only tax for purposes of paying for those who collect more taxes??

Furthermore, are you an anarchist because your "town trick" argument is exactly how any form of government works.
There are not multiple governments and even in the small limited federal government wetdreams of conservatives our founding fathers still set forth a single federal governent.

Even on a local level you still have to deal with one centralized local govenrment or are you arguing that we should have a "free market govenrment" where several forms of government exist and compete with each other for our tax dollars in an open market? How exaclty would tha work?

If that type of flawed reasoning is what you are trying to use to show the holes in my argument the what have you done to fill the hoels in yours??



Again, when are you going to point out holes in my argument? All you seem to be doing is presenting one hole filled argument after another that are based solely on your warped and misguided opinions as you try to define taxpayer to suit your needs for your new hole-filled argument. They still pay taxes and work for their pay makiing them just as much a citizen or "normal person" as you are. no matter what your beliefs about govenrment are nothing will change that fact.




Are you trying to say that this is a hole in my argument? But I said NOTHING of the sort. This is all that i said in reference to public sector workers.



so how did you draw all of that from that one sentence?? Do you often have to make shite up and attribute it to others so you can attack them for things they never said or is this something new for you?



Oh really??



Oops looks like another hole in your spin.




again who is actually saying that?? Instead of pulling shite out of thin air why don't you try addressing what people actually say?



Yeah we all get that you hate public sector workers and consider them less than a normal citizen or person but what does your warped and unsubstantiated opinion have to do with the facts of the argument?




So not only do you put words into peoples mouths but now you are a mind reader too??



Even though based on your own words that should be considered to be "servants" and less than "normal people?" Thanks for the spin.

Your argument is predicated on these false assumptions or sly scams of semantics in order to justify corruption, elitism and cronyism, and at least in WI, that's finally ending.

WHat's funny is that you barely touched on my simple argument that "public sector workers are taxpayers too" and ended up adding a ton of BS that doesn't even apply to me or my arguments.
Then in your final act of desperation you dishonestly define my argument based on a work of fiction that you dreamt up and has NOTHING to do with the actual content of my post.

So thanks again for nothing.

No one stated nor implied that public employees are "less than normal people".
You made that up..

NOPE I didn't make it up and I even cited fitz's post saying just that as well as his post referring the public sector workers as teh servants with the taxpayers as their masters. here is his comment that you thakned him for.

2. Since government employees pay taxes, it's their money and they're just 'normal people'. This is a deliberate mischaracterization of what's going on.

He tries to pretend that he is quoting me saying that "they're just 'normal people'" then he states that to do so "is a deliberate mischaracterization." In case you are not following along he is saying that my statement (even though I never actually said it) that they're just 'normal people' is a deliberate mischaracterization meaning that he believes that they're not just 'normal people'.

So care to retract your false accusation?

The fact is, public employees for the most part are good workers.

How nice of you to say considering how fitz feels about them and how you thanked him fore those opinions.

However, it is their unions which extort wages far above the prevailing market rate and of course those gold plated benefits.
When their contracts come up, the politicians are told by union managers "just raise taxes". For decades, they did just that.

Can I get a source please?? Your extortion comment shows a little bias on your part so I really can't take your word for it. So do you have a source or not?

Now that the private sector is suffering through one of the worst economic periods in decades, public workers and their unions are demanding raises and better benefits.

Actually no. When the whole budget and stripping collective bargaing rigths argument came up unions were more than willing to compromise but walker said NO.

Well,we've all had enough.

I have had enough of rightwingers making shite up to vilify taxpayers to allegedly defend or speak out for taxpayers.

We are no longer going to foot the bill so people in service to the public are far better off than those who fund their wages and benefits.

again the desperation is showing as you have to try and pretend that public sector workers are not taxpayers in order to try and make a point. If you have to be dishonest to make your point then maybe your point isn't valid to begin with?

No one is demanding public workers get treated unfairly or are to be at a disadvantage.

except the posters who refer to them as servants to their taxpaying masters or refer to them as tless than normal people and those who thank them for such comments.

We just want them to be compensated on a level scale with the private sector.

And there in lies the hypocrisy of the right. they pretend to be against the tactic of deciding who deserves what or earned what they have as the defend the rich but apparently they have no problem arguing that public workers don't deserve what they have even though their job is not the exact same as their private sector counterparts in most cases. See fits for his argument called "merit warfare" where he decides who deserves that they have and who doesn't.

We want our taxes to be reasonable.

You don't think unions want that too?

Union demands higher and higher wages and better benefits is in and of itself a tough pill to sallow.

Not if you realize how false an argument it is. Why would unions demand higher taxes to "pay for their increased pay and benefits" when their own increased income will be taxed at a higher rate?? That's counterproductive and only a moron would try to do something that stupid.

And it gets even worse in this economy.

everything gets worse in this type of economy so why only blame unions??

The public believes the workers who serve the public should not be given a better deal.....at the expense of the public.

I didn't realize that you speak for the entire public. When did the public nominate and elect you to speak for everyone else?

Furthermore, I love the shift from the old argument of "The taxpayer believes the workers who serve the public should not be given a better deal.....at the expense of the taxpayer" which is what rightwingers previously argued. This new translation of yours doesn't make the argument any better than the last way it was presented. BTW as fellow taxpayers aren't public workers sharing the expense of their own benefits?

Now,if that is objectionable or offends your sensitivities, you'll just have to be offended.
The movement to rein in public worker unions, wages and benefits is ON. It is spreading. And there is nothing that can be done to stop it.

And you finish it off with a lame attempt to slam me and empty rhetoric. LOL

I wonder if you will actually take the time to respond to my post as I did to yours? Somehow I doubt that you will.

 

[drsmith1072]

Tood want a cracker??

Sorry "weeded" was supposed to be "weed" wrong tense. However, Do you actually believe parroting the same nonresponsive BS makes a valid response if it is repeated enough times??
I spelled out how your argument is flawed and yet you parrot it again as if anything has changed.

Who took out the fraudulent signatures?
Or are they still in there?

Heard an interview of Walker this week. Walker stated the examination of the signatures for legitimacy will take about a month.
He went on to say that if there is to be an election, it would take place this summer.
I am going to take a flyer here that if the outcome of the signature results or the election does not go the way the petitioners expect, they will be marching into court day after day no doubt with 'evidence' of GOP 'cheating' or voter suppression.
Should be fun.

So walker delays the inevitable, costing the state more money which is what the right claims to be concerned about at least as far as the left is concerned and you see no problem with that?? WOW!

Furthermore, how can you criticize those who support this petition IF they want to sue when walker sued to get the GAB's responsibilities expanded to cover the responsibilities of his own challenge to the petition? Why is it ok for walker to sue and take this to court and not those who represent the petition??

And you actually got thanked for this?? WOW!!

 

[thereisnospoon]

Are you actually trying to argue that public sector taxpayers are somehow less of a citizen and don't or shouldn't have the same rights and private sector workers?? Oh wait you already did that.






I can't wait to see what your warped mind dreamt up,



So government builds nothing and provides no services for the money that they bring in through taxation, they only tax for purposes of paying for those who collect more taxes??

Furthermore, are you an anarchist because your "town trick" argument is exactly how any form of government works.
There are not multiple governments and even in the small limited federal government wetdreams of conservatives our founding fathers still set forth a single federal governent.

Even on a local level you still have to deal with one centralized local govenrment or are you arguing that we should have a "free market govenrment" where several forms of government exist and compete with each other for our tax dollars in an open market? How exaclty would tha work?

If that type of flawed reasoning is what you are trying to use to show the holes in my argument the what have you done to fill the hoels in yours??



Again, when are you going to point out holes in my argument? All you seem to be doing is presenting one hole filled argument after another that are based solely on your warped and misguided opinions as you try to define taxpayer to suit your needs for your new hole-filled argument. They still pay taxes and work for their pay makiing them just as much a citizen or "normal person" as you are. no matter what your beliefs about govenrment are nothing will change that fact.




Are you trying to say that this is a hole in my argument? But I said NOTHING of the sort. This is all that i said in reference to public sector workers.



so how did you draw all of that from that one sentence?? Do you often have to make shite up and attribute it to others so you can attack them for things they never said or is this something new for you?



Oh really??



Oops looks like another hole in your spin.




again who is actually saying that?? Instead of pulling shite out of thin air why don't you try addressing what people actually say?



Yeah we all get that you hate public sector workers and consider them less than a normal citizen or person but what does your warped and unsubstantiated opinion have to do with the facts of the argument?




So not only do you put words into peoples mouths but now you are a mind reader too??



Even though based on your own words that should be considered to be "servants" and less than "normal people?" Thanks for the spin.



WHat's funny is that you barely touched on my simple argument that "public sector workers are taxpayers too" and ended up adding a ton of BS that doesn't even apply to me or my arguments.
Then in your final act of desperation you dishonestly define my argument based on a work of fiction that you dreamt up and has NOTHING to do with the actual content of my post.

So thanks again for nothing.

No one stated nor implied that public employees are "less than normal people".
You made that up..

NOPE I didn't make it up and I even cited fitz's post saying just that as well as his post referring the public sector workers as teh servants with the taxpayers as their masters. here is his comment that you thakned him for.




He tries to pretend that he is quoting me saying that "they're just 'normal people'" then he states that to do so "is a deliberate mischaracterization." In case you are not following along he is saying that my statement (even though I never actually said it) that they're just 'normal people' is a deliberate mischaracterization meaning that he believes that they're not just 'normal people'.

So care to retract your false accusation?




How nice of you to say considering how fitz feels about them and how you thanked him fore those opinions.



Can I get a source please?? Your extortion comment shows a little bias on your part so I really can't take your word for it. So do you have a source or not?



Actually no. When the whole budget and stripping collective bargaing rigths argument came up unions were more than willing to compromise but walker said NO.



I have had enough of rightwingers making shite up to vilify taxpayers to allegedly defend or speak out for taxpayers.



again the desperation is showing as you have to try and pretend that public sector workers are not taxpayers in order to try and make a point. If you have to be dishonest to make your point then maybe your point isn't valid to begin with?



except the posters who refer to them as servants to their taxpaying masters or refer to them as tless than normal people and those who thank them for such comments.



And there in lies the hypocrisy of the right. they pretend to be against the tactic of deciding who deserves what or earned what they have as the defend the rich but apparently they have no problem arguing that public workers don't deserve what they have even though their job is not the exact same as their private sector counterparts in most cases. See fits for his argument called "merit warfare" where he decides who deserves that they have and who doesn't.



You don't think unions want that too?



Not if you realize how false an argument it is. Why would unions demand higher taxes to "pay for their increased pay and benefits" when their own increased income will be taxed at a higher rate?? That's counterproductive and only a moron would try to do something that stupid.



everything gets worse in this type of economy so why only blame unions??

The public believes the workers who serve the public should not be given a better deal.....at the expense of the public.

I didn't realize that you speak for the entire public. When did the public nominate and elect you to speak for everyone else?

Furthermore, I love the shift from the old argument of "The taxpayer believes the workers who serve the public should not be given a better deal.....at the expense of the taxpayer" which is what rightwingers previously argued. This new translation of yours doesn't make the argument any better than the last way it was presented. BTW as fellow taxpayers aren't public workers sharing the expense of their own benefits?

Now,if that is objectionable or offends your sensitivities, you'll just have to be offended.
The movement to rein in public worker unions, wages and benefits is ON. It is spreading. And there is nothing that can be done to stop it.

And you finish it off with a lame attempt to slam me and empty rhetoric. LOL

I wonder if you will actually take the time to respond to my post as I did to yours? Somehow I doubt that you will.

you are arguing just to argue. You answers are non responsive.
No one stated or implied government does not provide services. We just want it done on time and within budget.
Unions prevent that.
There are 22 states that prohibit public employees the right to collective bargaining. None are lacking in state or local services.
Public employees are not "less"..YOU have stated that several times...That is whipping a dead horse. Stop it.
Public workers pay themselves with their tax burden.
Again, I cite the raucous complaining from NJ public worker union bosses and the workers themselves when the tax cap was placed into law. If what you state is true then public workers should not mind when taxes are capped.
The system for the public sector is self serving. The unions contribute to the politicians who vote to continue the status quo. Taxpayers have finally told their elected officials they have had enough.
Now, if you do not have anything new to add, we're done here. No need for you to respond. My chat with you is complete. Go bother someone else with your carping.
Now you will fire the last shot and give me some shit about running away. You can stow it.
BTW, I am not concerned what other posters state. So your attempt to use Fitz's post as an offset is denied

 

[drsmith1072]

So what the lot of the posters want is teachers to take a large pay cut, no benefits. That way they are serving the public. My daughter is a kindergarten teacher in Wisconsin. Been doing it for 4 years. In no way do I see her being overpaid making $36,000 a year. But some here do.

Stop with the straw man shit.

says the king of the strawman.

Do you think it is right for public employees to be permitted to save up unlimited amounts of sick and vacation time and be paid for it when they retire? No one in the private sector gets that.

Who gets that? Got a link?

Do you think it correct that just because a person works a government job their ENTIRE family get free or very low cost health insurance?

Why not? Don't you want insurance for your family?? That applies to military personnel too do you want to take it away from them as well?

Do you think it just for the above to be ENTIRELY funded by the taxpayers with little or no contribution from the employee?

so they pay taxes, which pays for this benefit and yet you still argue that they offer little or no contribution?? LOL
Furthermore if they contribute even only a little (excluding how much they pay instaxes of course) then how is their benefit ENTIRELY funded by the taxpayer??

Do you think it correct for public sector workers to be paid far above market rate levels?

When refering to teachers, even though according to a previous source private school teachers make more on average, public school teacher's jobs are different than private school teachers who deal with smaller class sizes and usually a higher quality of student whose parents want the state to subsidize them sending their kids to a private school with a voucher program. So in that respect I think they deserve more pay than private school teachers but that is just my opinion as a taxpayer.

Some on your side claim that the taxpayers want public workers to be paid less, that they are "less then normal people".

Who said that?? I already quoted fitz's comment twice and you even thanked him for it when he originally posted it so why is it that you can't be honest about it and discuss it like and adult??

No ...That is NOT the case at all.

That is the one thing you said that i can actually agree is true but that is because no one made the argument that you posted. So you are right that it is not the case but only because no one made the argument that it's based on.

What we want is to stop the unions from getting EVERYTHING they want. To stop the conflict of interest. We want the public workers to actually pay their dues out of pocket rather than have them auto deducted from their pay. We also want them to have a choice as to whether or not they wish to join the union. We want stop them from giving away the store just because the politicians can simply increase taxes and then run away from any responsibility.
\No., We just want a level playing field. Pubic workers wages and benefits should mirror those in the private sector. No better. No worse.

Why is what you want so important even as you discard what they might want? Why are your wants more important than theirs??

 

[drsmith1072]

I responded to the content.
Your whining continued. Too bad.

There is a HUGE difference between saying that you did and actually doing it.

I posted about the law and your "response" was to quote one sentence of the law out of the context of the whole and post a smiley face while not really addressing the content or the law.

Then I posted a question about right wing money entering the state from outside sources since rightwingers are complaining about outside money on the left and no comment from you.

Again I point out the law and how walker sued to have a judge legislate from the bench to expand the responsibilities of the GAB and you couldn't respond to that specifics argument and then started parroting the same hypocritical BS abot how you are "Okay" with spending tax payer money to pay for this expansion of responsibilities while never commenting on walkers part in it nor his shifting the burden from himself to the state.

Then I ask how you can be against the expense of the recount and for walker making the state pay for it and you prvided no response to that specific question.

Then you take it one step further and claim that the unions or soros should pay for it even though that is completely opposite of WI law while you have NO comment on walker making the state pay for it.

Then you repeated the same question about "who weeded out the false names and invalid addresses" even AFTER I corrected my incorrect tense and explained that they would WEED them out. However, still no response to walkers shifting the responsibility from himself to the state other than parroting previous nonresponsive bs.

Furthermore, the cost of the recall is a core point that rightwingers including yourself have brought up. So it's funny how you are not concerned about walker adding to the costs?

That reeks of hypocrisy so thanks again for nothing.

Winning a lawsuit is no where close to 'legislating from the bench'...Walker's legal team won a judgement. Tough shit.

The judge redefining the responsibilites of the GAB was legislating from the bench. According to WI law the responsibility and burden of proving that signatures were duplicated and challenging them to have them removed was the responsibility of the challenger of the petition. The judge changed that and went against existing law declaring that the GAB had to take over that responsibility when it was not their resposibilty before. Rewriting existing law and procedures for the GAB and removing responsibilities from the challenger of the petition was legislating from the bench.

How many times does this have to be explained? I am trying really hard not to question your intelligence but you are making it very hard not to.

 

[drsmith1072]

I responded to the content.
Your whining continued. Too bad.

There is a HUGE difference between saying that you did and actually doing it.

I posted about the law and your "response" was to quote one sentence of the law out of the context of the whole and post a smiley face while not really addressing the content or the law.

Then I posted a question about right wing money entering the state from outside sources since rightwingers are complaining about outside money on the left and no comment from you.

Again I point out the law and how walker sued to have a judge legislate from the bench to expand the responsibilities of the GAB and you couldn't respond to that specifics argument and then started parroting the same hypocritical BS abot how you are "Okay" with spending tax payer money to pay for this expansion of responsibilities while never commenting on walkers part in it nor his shifting the burden from himself to the state.

Then I ask how you can be against the expense of the recount and for walker making the state pay for it and you prvided no response to that specific question.

Then you take it one step further and claim that the unions or soros should pay for it even though that is completely opposite of WI law while you have NO comment on walker making the state pay for it.

Then you repeated the same question about "who weeded out the false names and invalid addresses" even AFTER I corrected my incorrect tense and explained that they would WEED them out. However, still no response to walkers shifting the responsibility from himself to the state other than parroting previous nonresponsive bs.

Furthermore, the cost of the recall is a core point that rightwingers including yourself have brought up. So it's funny how you are not concerned about walker adding to the costs?

That reeks of hypocrisy so thanks again for nothing.

Outside money entered the state? OMG! So what.

The fact that the right uses the "outside money" argument to attack the left and are ok with it coming to help their side is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.

Walker sued and won, so what?

The fact that the right claims to be agaisnt activist judges who legislate from the bench and yet are ok with what this judge did for walker is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.

I am okay with the state paying to subtract the phony signatures.
Money well spent.

The fact that the right whines about the cost of the recall and yet have no problem with walker adding to the cost is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.

I haven't said a thing about the cost of the recall, if it happens.

No, not concerned about the cost of checking the petitions.

Then why did you chime in defending those who did when i questioned them over it??

You're welcome.
Thanks for whining.

Finally you answer some of the questions asked and expose the hypocrisy I was looking for. LOL

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is a HUGE difference between saying that you did and actually doing it.

I posted about the law and your "response" was to quote one sentence of the law out of the context of the whole and post a smiley face while not really addressing the content or the law.

Then I posted a question about right wing money entering the state from outside sources since rightwingers are complaining about outside money on the left and no comment from you.

Again I point out the law and how walker sued to have a judge legislate from the bench to expand the responsibilities of the GAB and you couldn't respond to that specifics argument and then started parroting the same hypocritical BS abot how you are "Okay" with spending tax payer money to pay for this expansion of responsibilities while never commenting on walkers part in it nor his shifting the burden from himself to the state.

Then I ask how you can be against the expense of the recount and for walker making the state pay for it and you prvided no response to that specific question.

Then you take it one step further and claim that the unions or soros should pay for it even though that is completely opposite of WI law while you have NO comment on walker making the state pay for it.

Then you repeated the same question about "who weeded out the false names and invalid addresses" even AFTER I corrected my incorrect tense and explained that they would WEED them out. However, still no response to walkers shifting the responsibility from himself to the state other than parroting previous nonresponsive bs.

Furthermore, the cost of the recall is a core point that rightwingers including yourself have brought up. So it's funny how you are not concerned about walker adding to the costs?

That reeks of hypocrisy so thanks again for nothing.

Outside money entered the state? OMG! So what.

The fact that the right uses the "outside money" argument to attack the left and are ok with it coming to help their side is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right claims to be agaisnt activist judges who legislate from the bench and yet are ok with what this judge did for walker is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right whines about the cost of the recall and yet have no problem with walker adding to the cost is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.

I haven't said a thing about the cost of the recall, if it happens.

No, not concerned about the cost of checking the petitions.

Then why did you chime in defending those who did when i questioned them over it??

You're welcome.
Thanks for whining.

Finally you answer some of the questions asked and expose the hypocrisy I was looking for. LOL

Republicans get some outside money to fight the Dems outside money. So sad.
The state will spend money to throw out your fake signatures, so sad.
Glad I could clear that up for you.

 

[drsmith1072]

Really dude?
Get this through your thick as a brick liberal skull..Public employees SERVE the PUBLIC.
Their wages are funded BY THE TAXPAYERS..
The public is not a "master". However, public employees are in SERVICE to the public.

So let me get this straight we were right for calling him out for referring to the public as the masters of public workers but we were wrong for calling him out for referring to public workers as servants because in your words they "serve the public?"

It's nice that you can separate the two of them to suit your needs. However in the context that he used them it's not really that simple. Masters and servants has a pretty distinct meaning when used together in the context that he used and to try to separate them after the fact that they were used together only goes to show how desperate some posters on the right are becoming.

Oh and how about how pubic workers seeing as how they are taxpayers fund their own wages. LOL I never get tired of that pointless argument from rightwingers. LOL

How difficult is it to understand that public employees SERVE the public..That is their ******* job.

and if that was all that he said then there would be no problem. However, in the CONTEXT of using the term servant with masters how he did it is a much more darker meaning than just simply claiming that they "serve the public."

This is not suiting anything. You are merely projecting.
You have NO valid argument here.

says the hack who has yet to provide a valid argument to counter anything I said with anything that was of greater significance that saying "Nuh uh" and declaring that I am wrong with no substance to support it. You even admitted he was wrong to use the word "masters" in that context so are you backtracking on that point of mine that you previously said was valid? Oops stuck your foot in your mouth there. LOL

You are in defense of an archaic system that has tested the patience of the taxpayers to the point where they have said "NO MORE"...

Really what about the taxpayers who are members of unions? Don't they get a voice too??

Public worker unions have been feeding from the trough of greed for long enough. Taxpayers are fighting back. This is just the beginning. Wisconsin's beat back of public worker unions is not unique.
Indiana, Ohio New York and New Jersey are other states where the way government does business with public worker's unions are being challenged...Still other states are considering ending defined benefit pensions and rolling back health insurance coverage to contain costs.
Stop trying to argue a dead point.
This really has nothing to do with the public employees. This is about taxpayers and taxes . Taxes collected to fund public worker wages and benefits are unsustainable.

Thanks for the baseless rhetoric where you pretend to speak for the public and all taxpayers. Let me know when you have an actual argument to present where you don't pretend that you are all-powerful and then we can talk.

 

[drsmith1072]

No one stated nor implied that public employees are "less than normal people".
You made that up..

NOPE I didn't make it up and I even cited fitz's post saying just that as well as his post referring the public sector workers as teh servants with the taxpayers as their masters. here is his comment that you thakned him for.




He tries to pretend that he is quoting me saying that "they're just 'normal people'" then he states that to do so "is a deliberate mischaracterization." In case you are not following along he is saying that my statement (even though I never actually said it) that they're just 'normal people' is a deliberate mischaracterization meaning that he believes that they're not just 'normal people'.

So care to retract your false accusation?




How nice of you to say considering how fitz feels about them and how you thanked him fore those opinions.



Can I get a source please?? Your extortion comment shows a little bias on your part so I really can't take your word for it. So do you have a source or not?



Actually no. When the whole budget and stripping collective bargaing rigths argument came up unions were more than willing to compromise but walker said NO.



I have had enough of rightwingers making shite up to vilify taxpayers to allegedly defend or speak out for taxpayers.



again the desperation is showing as you have to try and pretend that public sector workers are not taxpayers in order to try and make a point. If you have to be dishonest to make your point then maybe your point isn't valid to begin with?



except the posters who refer to them as servants to their taxpaying masters or refer to them as tless than normal people and those who thank them for such comments.



And there in lies the hypocrisy of the right. they pretend to be against the tactic of deciding who deserves what or earned what they have as the defend the rich but apparently they have no problem arguing that public workers don't deserve what they have even though their job is not the exact same as their private sector counterparts in most cases. See fits for his argument called "merit warfare" where he decides who deserves that they have and who doesn't.



You don't think unions want that too?



Not if you realize how false an argument it is. Why would unions demand higher taxes to "pay for their increased pay and benefits" when their own increased income will be taxed at a higher rate?? That's counterproductive and only a moron would try to do something that stupid.



everything gets worse in this type of economy so why only blame unions??



I didn't realize that you speak for the entire public. When did the public nominate and elect you to speak for everyone else?

Furthermore, I love the shift from the old argument of "The taxpayer believes the workers who serve the public should not be given a better deal.....at the expense of the taxpayer" which is what rightwingers previously argued. This new translation of yours doesn't make the argument any better than the last way it was presented. BTW as fellow taxpayers aren't public workers sharing the expense of their own benefits?

Now,if that is objectionable or offends your sensitivities, you'll just have to be offended.
The movement to rein in public worker unions, wages and benefits is ON. It is spreading. And there is nothing that can be done to stop it.

And you finish it off with a lame attempt to slam me and empty rhetoric. LOL

I wonder if you will actually take the time to respond to my post as I did to yours? Somehow I doubt that you will.

you are arguing just to argue. You answers are non responsive.
No one stated or implied government does not provide services. We just want it done on time and within budget.
Unions prevent that.
There are 22 states that prohibit public employees the right to collective bargaining. None are lacking in state or local services.
Public employees are not "less"..YOU have stated that several times...That is whipping a dead horse. Stop it.
Public workers pay themselves with their tax burden.
Again, I cite the raucous complaining from NJ public worker union bosses and the workers themselves when the tax cap was placed into law. If what you state is true then public workers should not mind when taxes are capped.
The system for the public sector is self serving. The unions contribute to the politicians who vote to continue the status quo. Taxpayers have finally told their elected officials they have had enough.
Now, if you do not have anything new to add, we're done here. No need for you to respond. My chat with you is complete. Go bother someone else with your carping.
Now you will fire the last shot and give me some shit about running away. You can stow it.

You are the king of nonresponsive bs and this is a perfect example. I responded to almost every part of your post except for the opinion based rhetoric yet you don't have the integrity to offer me the same courtesy. So thanks for running away from content that you can't counter.

BTW, I am not concerned what other posters state. So your attempt to use Fitz's post as an offset is denied

BTW when you claim that no one said something while accusing me of making it up but then I point out how they did say it and show that I didn't make it up, a poster with integrity would admit that they were wrong and retract their false accusation instead of making lame excuses as they run away.

No one stated nor implied that public employees are "less than normal people".
You made that up..

Thanks for showing your true colors and lack of integrity.

 

[drsmith1072]

Outside money entered the state? OMG! So what.

The fact that the right uses the "outside money" argument to attack the left and are ok with it coming to help their side is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right claims to be agaisnt activist judges who legislate from the bench and yet are ok with what this judge did for walker is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right whines about the cost of the recall and yet have no problem with walker adding to the cost is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



Then why did you chime in defending those who did when i questioned them over it??

You're welcome.
Thanks for whining.

Finally you answer some of the questions asked and expose the hypocrisy I was looking for. LOL

Republicans get some outside money to fight the Dems outside money. So sad.
The state will spend money to throw out your fake signatures, so sad.
Glad I could clear that up for you.

Thanks for the hypocrisy and lack of integrity.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The fact that the right uses the "outside money" argument to attack the left and are ok with it coming to help their side is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right claims to be agaisnt activist judges who legislate from the bench and yet are ok with what this judge did for walker is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right whines about the cost of the recall and yet have no problem with walker adding to the cost is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



Then why did you chime in defending those who did when i questioned them over it??



Finally you answer some of the questions asked and expose the hypocrisy I was looking for. LOL

Republicans get some outside money to fight the Dems outside money. So sad.
The state will spend money to throw out your fake signatures, so sad.
Glad I could clear that up for you.

Thanks for the hypocrisy and lack of integrity.

Waaaaah!

 

[Big Fitz]

Really dude?
Get this through your thick as a brick liberal skull..Public employees SERVE the PUBLIC.
Their wages are funded BY THE TAXPAYERS..
The public is not a "master". However, public employees are in SERVICE to the public.

So let me get this straight we were right for calling him out for referring to the public as the masters of public workers but we were wrong for calling him out for referring to public workers as servants because in your words they "serve the public?"

It's nice that you can separate the two of them to suit your needs. However in the context that he used them it's not really that simple. Masters and servants has a pretty distinct meaning when used together in the context that he used and to try to separate them after the fact that they were used together only goes to show how desperate some posters on the right are becoming.

Oh and how about how pubic workers seeing as how they are taxpayers fund their own wages. LOL I never get tired of that pointless argument from rightwingers. LOL

How difficult is it to understand that public employees SERVE the public..That is their ******* job.
This is not suiting anything. You are merely projecting.
You have NO valid argument here.
You are in defense of an archaic system that has tested the patience of the taxpayers to the point where they have said "NO MORE"...
Public worker unions have been feeding from the trough of greed for long enough. Taxpayers are fighting back. This is just the beginning. Wisconsin's beat back of public worker unions is not unique.
Indiana, Ohio New York and New Jersey are other states where the way government does business with public worker's unions are being challenged...Still other states are considering ending defined benefit pensions and rolling back health insurance coverage to contain costs.
Stop trying to argue a dead point.
This really has nothing to do with the public employees. This is about taxpayers and taxes . Taxes collected to fund public worker wages and benefits are unsustainable.

You've much more patience than me.

 

[thereisnospoon]

So let me get this straight we were right for calling him out for referring to the public as the masters of public workers but we were wrong for calling him out for referring to public workers as servants because in your words they "serve the public?"

It's nice that you can separate the two of them to suit your needs. However in the context that he used them it's not really that simple. Masters and servants has a pretty distinct meaning when used together in the context that he used and to try to separate them after the fact that they were used together only goes to show how desperate some posters on the right are becoming.

Oh and how about how pubic workers seeing as how they are taxpayers fund their own wages. LOL I never get tired of that pointless argument from rightwingers. LOL

How difficult is it to understand that public employees SERVE the public..That is their ******* job.
This is not suiting anything. You are merely projecting.
You have NO valid argument here.
You are in defense of an archaic system that has tested the patience of the taxpayers to the point where they have said "NO MORE"...
Public worker unions have been feeding from the trough of greed for long enough. Taxpayers are fighting back. This is just the beginning. Wisconsin's beat back of public worker unions is not unique.
Indiana, Ohio New York and New Jersey are other states where the way government does business with public worker's unions are being challenged...Still other states are considering ending defined benefit pensions and rolling back health insurance coverage to contain costs.
Stop trying to argue a dead point.
This really has nothing to do with the public employees. This is about taxpayers and taxes . Taxes collected to fund public worker wages and benefits are unsustainable.

You've much more patience than me.

Dr smith keeps arguing points not in the discussion.
so I shut him down....Notice how he tried to draw me back into the discussion on HIS terms..I refuse to debate with someone who defends the indefensible.
He would have a valid point if I were alone in my views. Dr smith is fighting an ideas that is spreading across the country. He is fighting against the will of the people.
So I cut him off. Oh, I am sure if he reads this he'll show his ass with another post to try to get me to respond. Some sort of insult or swipe. His effort will be wasted keystrokes..
Now, watch this.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is a HUGE difference between saying that you did and actually doing it.

I posted about the law and your "response" was to quote one sentence of the law out of the context of the whole and post a smiley face while not really addressing the content or the law.

Then I posted a question about right wing money entering the state from outside sources since rightwingers are complaining about outside money on the left and no comment from you.

Again I point out the law and how walker sued to have a judge legislate from the bench to expand the responsibilities of the GAB and you couldn't respond to that specifics argument and then started parroting the same hypocritical BS abot how you are "Okay" with spending tax payer money to pay for this expansion of responsibilities while never commenting on walkers part in it nor his shifting the burden from himself to the state.

Then I ask how you can be against the expense of the recount and for walker making the state pay for it and you prvided no response to that specific question.

Then you take it one step further and claim that the unions or soros should pay for it even though that is completely opposite of WI law while you have NO comment on walker making the state pay for it.

Then you repeated the same question about "who weeded out the false names and invalid addresses" even AFTER I corrected my incorrect tense and explained that they would WEED them out. However, still no response to walkers shifting the responsibility from himself to the state other than parroting previous nonresponsive bs.

Furthermore, the cost of the recall is a core point that rightwingers including yourself have brought up. So it's funny how you are not concerned about walker adding to the costs?

That reeks of hypocrisy so thanks again for nothing.

Outside money entered the state? OMG! So what.

The fact that the right uses the "outside money" argument to attack the left and are ok with it coming to help their side is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right claims to be agaisnt activist judges who legislate from the bench and yet are ok with what this judge did for walker is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.



The fact that the right whines about the cost of the recall and yet have no problem with walker adding to the cost is hypocrisy. Thanks for clearing that up.

I haven't said a thing about the cost of the recall, if it happens.

No, not concerned about the cost of checking the petitions.

Then why did you chime in defending those who did when i questioned them over it??

You're welcome.
Thanks for whining.

Finally you answer some of the questions asked and expose the hypocrisy I was looking for. LOL

I didn't complain about outside Dem money, so my lack of complaint about outside Republican money isn't hypocrisy.

I didn't complain about judicial activism, so not complaining here isn't hypocrisy.

I didn't complain about the cost of the recall, so not complaining about the cost of the petition check isn't hypocrisy.

Don't know who you think I defended, so I'll guess that wasn't hypocrisy either.

Let me know when you have something besides your whining. LOL!

 

[Big Fitz]

How difficult is it to understand that public employees SERVE the public..That is their ******* job.
This is not suiting anything. You are merely projecting.
You have NO valid argument here.
You are in defense of an archaic system that has tested the patience of the taxpayers to the point where they have said "NO MORE"...
Public worker unions have been feeding from the trough of greed for long enough. Taxpayers are fighting back. This is just the beginning. Wisconsin's beat back of public worker unions is not unique.
Indiana, Ohio New York and New Jersey are other states where the way government does business with public worker's unions are being challenged...Still other states are considering ending defined benefit pensions and rolling back health insurance coverage to contain costs.
Stop trying to argue a dead point.
This really has nothing to do with the public employees. This is about taxpayers and taxes . Taxes collected to fund public worker wages and benefits are unsustainable.

You've much more patience than me.

Dr smith keeps arguing points not in the discussion.
so I shut him down....Notice how he tried to draw me back into the discussion on HIS terms..I refuse to debate with someone who defends the indefensible.
He would have a valid point if I were alone in my views. Dr smith is fighting an ideas that is spreading across the country. He is fighting against the will of the people.
So I cut him off. Oh, I am sure if he reads this he'll show his ass with another post to try to get me to respond. Some sort of insult or swipe. His effort will be wasted keystrokes..
Now, watch this.

It's why I threw him on ignore finally.